Exploring Grad Dis

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 24

EXPLORING GRADUATION DISPARITIES AMONG STUDENTS WITH

DISABILITIES IN THE SOUTH: ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF IDEA POLICY

IMPLEMENTATION

Dissertation Submitted to

The Nelson Mandela College of Government and Social Sciences

W
Southern University and A&M College
IE
EV

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

The Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in Public Policy and Urban Affairs


PR

By

Maat-Njeri Emayana Latham M.Ed.

Baton Rouge, La

December, 2023
EXPLORING GRADUATION DISPARITIES AMONG STUDENTS W I T H

DISABILITIES IN THE SOUTH: ASSESSING THE I M PA C T OF IDEA

POLICY IMPLEMENTATION

, Maat-Njeri

essa Greenslade, Ph.D.


Committee Chair
Assistant Professor

W
Xavier Hoy, Ph:
Committee Member
IE
EV
PR

Melanie Johnson, Ph.D.


Committee Member
Assistant Professor

Atttit-7+7
Damien Ejigiri, Ph.D.
Dean Nelson Mandela College of Government and Social Sciences

11/22/2023

Albertha Lawson, Ph.D.


Dean of Graduate School
COPYRIGHT PAGE

W
IE
© Copyright by
EV

Maat-Njeri Emayana Latham

All rights reserved

2023
PR

iii
ABSTRACT

EXPLORING GRADUATION DISPARITIES AMONG STUDENTS WITH


DISABILITIES IN THE SOUTH: ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF IDEA POLICY
IMPLEMENTATION

Name: Latham, Maat-Njeri

Southern University and A&M College

Advisor: Dr. Vanessa Greenslade

W
The purpose of this study is to explore graduation disparities among students

with disabilities in the southern region of the United States and assess the impact of
IE
IDEA policy implementation within these 11 states. The intent of this research is to
EV

establish whether there is a connection between special education policies and

graduation rates for students with disabilities. This research analyzes policies found

within the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) from federal and state
PR

levels. Taking a comprehensive look at IDEA policies is critical in understanding

what guidelines have been put in place to address the barriers students with

disabilities face and how effective implementation of these policies are.

The methodology used in this research is a mixed method approach.

Graduation rates were collected from 11 states throughout the south that spanned an

8-year timeframe. A thorough analysis of 9 policies areas was conducted. The

qualitative data collected focused on the graduation rates of students with disabilities.

This dissertation contributes to the understanding of what is effective in

enhancing the quality of life for students with disabilities. Highlighting systemic

problems and advocating for equal opportunities, this research seeks to identify

iv
policies that if implemented properly will improve learning outcomes as well as

graduation rates for students with disabilities in the south.

W
IE
EV
PR

v
DEDICATION

This body of work is dedicated to my son Andrew Gibran Latham. October 23,

2003, was the most pivotal day of my life. On this day God allowed me to not only hold

my baby boy in my arms for the first time but he gave me the biggest gift of life, the

privilege of motherhood.

Andrew,

W
You came into this world, illuminating it with your spirit and your presence

brought me peace. I remember staring at you in amazement while saying “it’s nice to
IE
finally meet you” and you gave me the biggest smile, with that moment came a
EV

profound revelation. It was an affirmation that life is a divinely scripted masterpiece,

full of miracles that only our omnipotent God can compose.

In your journey from a child to a man of character, I have learned so much about
PR

love, patience, and the power of dreams and faith. Your inquisitive nature has always

encouraged me to seek knowledge, and your resilience has taught me to persevere, even

when the odds appear to not be in our favor. With God on our side, you and I have

continued to prevail.

You are a blessing to me Andrew. With each passing day, you continue to amaze

me with your kindness, intelligence, and creativity. You, my son, are the inspiration

behind every page of this dissertation. May this work serve as a testament to your

influence and my love for you.

Your mom,
Maat-Njeri Emayana Latham

vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to start by expressing my sincerest gratitude to God for granting

me this incredible opportunity. Without his strength, mercy and love this would not

have been possible. His presence and blessings are instrumental in my success.

I extend a heartfelt appreciation to Dr. VerJanis Peoples, for her invaluable

wisdom and support. Her selflessness and commitment to education is inspiring. I am

W
forever grateful for her investing in developing me both as a leader and as an

individual.
IE
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the dean of the Nelson

Mandela College, Dr. Damien Ejigiri, for believing in me. Your visionary leadership
EV

has created an environment that fosters excellence.

Furthermore, I am indebted to my dissertation chair, Dr. Greenslade, whose


PR

unwavering dedication to my research assisted me in unearthing findings that can

change the lives of students with disabilities. Additionally, I would like to express my

gratitude to my dissertation committee. I am honored to work with such distinguished

professionals.

Lastly, I would like to express my appreciation to my fellow cohort members,

whose support, camaraderie, and shared experiences have made this journey special.

The friendships, encouragement and intellectual discussion have been a source of

inspiration and motivation.

In conclusion, I am humbled and grateful for friends and family members who

played a significant role in my life as I completed this dissertation. You have been

vii
pillars of strength and inspiration. Your wise advice was invaluable, and your

presence kept me focused. Many Thanks,

Maat-Njeri E. Latham

W
IE
EV
PR

viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPROVAL PAGE ....................................................................................................... ii

COPYRIGHT PAGE .................................................................................................. iiii

ABSTRACT................................................................................................................iiiv

DEDICATION ............................................................................................................. vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................................... vii

CHAPTER 1 – Introduction.......................................................................................... 1

Genesis of the Problem........................................................................................... 1

Historical Background of Federal Special Education Policies ............................... 5

W
Statement of the Problem ..................................................................................... 16
IE
Purpose of the Study............................................................................................. 17

Research Questions .............................................................................................. 18


EV

Significance of the Study ..................................................................................... 18

Logic Model ......................................................................................................... 19

Organization of the Study..................................................................................... 20


PR

Definition of Terms .............................................................................................. 21

CHAPTER 2 – Theoretical Framework ...................................................................... 22

Major Concepts or Tenets Associated With the Framework ............................... 23

Link Between the Theoretical Framework and the Study .................................... 29

Empirical Studies That Utilize the Framework .................................................... 30

Importance of the Framework to Public Policy.................................................... 32

ix
CHAPTER 3 - LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................... 35

Factors Influencing Successful Graduation Outcomes ........................................ 36

Comparison of Graduation Rates and Policies in States With Lower Rates ........ 38

Impact of Assistive Technology on Educational Outcomes ................................ 35

Research Design ................................................................................................... 69

Background .......................................................................................................... 70

Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 77

Data Analysis and Model Specification ............................................................... 80

Model Specification ............................................................................................. 82

W
Reliability and Validity ........................................................................................ 82

CHAPTER 5 -ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION..................................... 84


IE
Answers to Research Questions ................................................................................... 85

Alabama ....................................................................................................................... 87
EV

Arkansas....................................................................................................................... 90

Florida .......................................................................................................................... 91
PR

Georgia......................................................................................................................... 93

Kentucky ...................................................................................................................... 95

Louisiana ...................................................................................................................... 97

Mississippi ................................................................................................................. 101

North Carolina ........................................................................................................... 103

South Carolina ........................................................................................................... 104

Tennessee ................................................................................................................... 106

Alabama ..................................................................................................................... 109

Arkansas..................................................................................................................... 110

Florida ........................................................................................................................ 112

x
Georgia....................................................................................................................... 114

Kentucky .................................................................................................................... 116

Louisiana .................................................................................................................... 118

Mississippi ................................................................................................................. 120

North Carolina ........................................................................................................... 121

South Carolina ........................................................................................................... 122

Tennessee ................................................................................................................... 123

Texas .......................................................................................................................... 125

Eligibility ................................................................................................................... 126

W
IEP.............................................................................................................................. 129

FAPE .......................................................................................................................... 133


IE
LRE ............................................................................................................................ 137

Dispute Resolution Policy.......................................................................................... 140


EV

Graduation and Transition ......................................................................................... 146

Assistive Technology ................................................................................................. 155


PR

State Assessments ...................................................................................................... 163

Teacher Qualifications ............................................................................................... 169

Funding ...................................................................................................................... 177

CHAPTER 6 – Implications, Recommendations and Conclusions ........................... 181

Implications of Policy on Special Education Graduation Rates ................................ 183

Limitations ................................................................................................................. 184

Implications for Future research ................................................................................ 185

Recommendation for Future Research....................................................................... 186

Summary .................................................................................................................... 186

References .................................................................................................................. 188

xi
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Genesis of the Problem

Historically, the United States has lacked explicit federal mandates to

address the graduation rates of students with special needs, with a primary focus

on ensuring their access to education and appropriate accommodations. However,

W
as mandates emerged, they were established with a primary focus on ensuring that

students with special needs had access to education through appropriate


IE
accommodations. To comprehensively understand the impact of special education
EV

policy on graduation rates, it is crucial to delve into the origins of special

education itself. The nation’s embarkment on a journey to establish an inclusive

system for students with disabilities, began with the establishment of the first
PR

school dedicated to special education, the American School for the Deaf, in 1817

school. This milestone has paved the way for the development of comprehensive

policies and programs tailored to meet the unique needs of these students.

Special education refers to a specialized form of instruction designed

specifically to cater to students with disabilities. This term is a unique pedagogical

approach aimed at facilitating knowledge acquisition and personal development

and ensuring equal access to education by addressing the distinctive challenges

faced by these students. The interchangeable term “special needs” gained

recognition after the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education

Act (IDEA) (National Centre on Disability and Journalism, 2018). The term

1
"special needs", which refers to a student with disabilities, encapsulates a

spectrum of conditions, including physical, cognitive, sensory, and emotional

impairments. A student with a disability is a person evaluated in accordance with

§§300.304 through 300.311 as having an intellectual disability, a hearing

impairment (including deafness), a speech or language impairment, a visual

impairment (including blindness), a serious emotional disturbance (referred to in

this part as “emotional disturbance”), an orthopedic impairment, autism, traumatic

brain injury, another health impairment, a specific learning disability, deaf-

blindness, or multiple disabilities, and who, by reason thereof, needs special

W
education and related services (U.S. Department of Education, 2018).

In the realm of special education, the terms special needs and disabilities
IE
are interwoven and often used interchangeably to describe the unique

requirements and challenges of students who need additional support to reach


EV

their educational goals. Special needs are a blanket term that covers physical,

cognitive, emotional, and behavioral challenges that may hinder a student’s ability
PR

to learn and engage effectively in traditional education settings. Disabilities,

which are a subset of special needs, primarily focus on specific impairments,

disorders, and conditions that make it difficult for students to progress in an

academic environment. These terms form the foundation of special education,

which offers tailored services, environments, instruction, accommodations, and

modifications, all of which ensure equitable access to education for students who

need extra support.

The primary objective of special education is to facilitate the smooth

transition of students with disabilities from an academic setting to a professional

world by providing them with the necessary resources and skills to graduate from

2
high school, secure employment, pursue higher education, and achieve self-

sufficiency. Individuals eligible for special education services are assigned to an

educational setting that provides the fewest possible limitations to their learning

experiences. While today’s approach is to educate students with special needs in

their least restrictive environment, it is important to understand the historical

context that shaped these practices. The legal term, least restrictive environment,

is designated by IDEA to refer to an educational environment for students with

special needs that provides the most appropriate level of support for their

disability while allowing them to benefit in the educational environment with their

W
non-disabled peers to the greatest extent possible (States 2006).

Inception of Special Education in the United States


IE
Approximately two centuries following the formation of the United States

in 1776, was a dearth of initiatives that cater to the educational requirements of


EV

students with special needs. Historically, special education services for students

with disabilities have not always been guaranteed in the U.S. The initial
PR

introduction of early special education programs was intended as a delinquency

prevention measure for children living in urban slums or deemed at risk due to a

disability. Urban school districts designed manual training courses for disabled

students to supplement their comprehensive curriculum.

The first academic institution designed to cater to the educatizaq12onal

requirements of students with special needs, the American School for the Deaf

(ASD), was founded by Laurent Clerc and Thomas Gallaudet in 1817 in Hartford,

Connecticut (American School for the Deaf, 2013). This institution was the first of

its kind to serve children with special needs in the Western Hemisphere. ASD's

approach to deaf education was revolutionary because it diverged from the

3
previous oralist approach, which used oral instructions to train those with hearing

impairments in the skill of speech creation and lip-reading. ASD’s approach was

revolutionary because it acknowledged the linguistic and cultural differences of

deaf students and provided them an educational path tailored to their unique

needs, as opposed to conforming to a hearing-centric educational model (Bridges

for Deaf, n.d.).

In 1834, Dr. Sam Gridley Howe led a significant educational reform by

founding the Perkins Institution to provide a formal education for blind (Heller,

1979). Under Dr. Howe's guidance, the institution not only provided academic

W
instruction but also fostered student empowerment and independence, marking a

pivotal moment in the history of special education. This groundbreaking initiative


IE
paved the way for future developments in special education as similar models for

institutions and programs began to emerge worldwide. The success of deaf and
EV

blind students in mainstream classrooms at the Perkins Institute sparked renewed

interest in developing effective strategies and interventions for students with


PR

special needs (Spaulding & Pratt, 2015).

The evolution of special education expanded from serving only deaf and

blind students to also serving students with intellectual challenges when Amos

P.S. Gushing founded The Syracuse State Institution in 1851. This institution

catered to the needs of what was then referred to as the mentally handicapped

population, a term no longer in use today because of its negative connotations.

The school's vision was to enhance the abilities of these individuals through

training and to equip them with the necessary resources for personal and

professional development (Syracuse State Institution for Feeble-Minded Children,

2013). By 1890, a substantial number of children with special needs had been

4
educated in manual classes, learning various skills such as carpentry, metalwork,

sewing, cooking, and drawing (Wright & Wright, 2004).

Historical Background of Federal Special Education Policies

Although pockets of programs were scattered throughout the country, the

United States did not have federal regulations in place that mandated educating

students with special needs until 1965. In many cases prior 1965, parents with

children who presented extreme cognitive or emotional disabilities, deafness,

blindness, or required speech therapy, were obligated to either provide home-

based education or incur the cost of private education.

W
Elementary and Secondary Education Act
IE
The ascension of The United States’ societal beliefs about educating all

individuals conceptualized itself during President Lydon B. Johnson’s


EV

administration. The Great Society and War on Poverty were fundamental elements

of President Johnson’s agenda. To make his agenda a reality, Johnson introduced

a significant reform of federal education policy, which expeditiously resulted in


PR

the enactment of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965

(McGuinn & Van Der Slik, 2018). The aim of the ESEA was to address the

educational disparities experienced by disadvantaged children by providing equal

access to quality primary and secondary education (Rioux, 1965). In the field of

education, the term disadvantaged children embodies a vast range of students who

face challenges that impede their academic progress and development. This

includes special education students, who often have learning, cognitive, or

behavioral disabilities that require tailored support and resources to help them

5
reach their full potential. These students are at risk of experiencing educational

disparities that their peers do not experience.

The purpose of this Act was to facilitate provisions of quality education to

disadvantaged children, which included disabled students (Wright & Wright,

2004). A significant component of ESEA focused on closing the literacy and

numeracy gap for disadvantaged students (Paul, 2018). This act allocated funds

for various areas of education such as special education, educational research,

school libraries and adult education (ESEA/NCLB, n.d). In addition, ESEA

authorized state-administered initiatives aimed at improving the academic

W
performance of disadvantaged students. These programs were designed to address

the multifaceted challenges faced by students with disabilities, mobility issues,


IE
learning disabilities, economic hardship, transience, or limited English

proficiency.
EV

Education of the Handicapped Act

The Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA) (Public Law 91-230) was
PR

implemented in 1970 to replace the ESEA act of 1965. The Education of the

Handicapped Act (P.L. 91-230) was passed by Congress with the aim of

incentivizing states to establish educational initiatives for persons with disabilities

(Wright & Wright, 2004). The Education of the Handicapped Act aimed to

encourage the development of educational programs and resources for individuals

with disabilities. The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) ensured

that every child with a disability in all states and localities throughout the nation

was entitled to receive a free and suitable public education, commonly referred to

as FAPE (Wright & Wright, 2004).

6
Education for All Handicapped Children Act

The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142)

was implemented in 1975 as an amendment to EHA. EAHCA guaranteed that

students with disabilities enrolled in public schools will receive a complimentary

daily meal and equitable access to educational opportunities. The educational

institutions that were obligated to offer this service are those that receive financial

support from the federal government for their day-to-day functioning.

Furthermore, it was imperative to devise a lesson plan for each category of

students, with the primary objective being to ensure that these plans are as similar

as possible to those designed for students who are physically and mentally

capable.

W
IE
Another provision of this Act required school districts to establish a

department responsible for addressing parental complaints, with the objective of


EV

ensuring equal educational opportunities for students with disabilities. In instances

where students’ educational needs are inadequately addressed, parents have

recourse to various tools, such as district-level complaint channels, mediation, and


PR

due process hearings, to address and resolve their concerns about their children’s

education. These tools are essential components of a comprehensive dispute

resolution system that allows schools and parents to resolve their differences

without the need for a formal due process hearing (U. S. Government

Accountability Office, 1980).

The implementation of EAHCA also introduced a mandate requiring each

student who received special education services to have an Individualized

Education Plan (IEP). IEPs serve as the blueprint for the educational journey of a

student with disabilities, detailing their individual needs and the specific services

7
necessary to meet those needs. The aim of this personalized learning experience is

to encourage inclusivity and equal opportunity, ensuring that all students can

access quality education, regardless of their disability.

Although the EHA and EAHCA acts are connected to ESEA, they did not

serve as replacements for it. The ESEA represented a broad federal law that

centered on supplying funding and support to every disadvantaged student in

public schools. Subsequentially, the EHA and EAHCA acts were designed to cater

to the unique needs of children with disabilities (U.S. Department of Education,

2020).

W
Evolvement of EHA Into Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

IDEA is a federal law that supports special education and related services
IE
for children and teenagers with disabilities. This law ensures that individuals with

disabilities can access free and suitable public education that is tailored to their
EV

unique needs. Furthermore, it prepares them for post-secondary education,

employment, and independent living. The legislation, which was enacted in 1975,
PR

was initially referred to as the Education of Handicapped Children. The law was

updated in 1990, resulting in the change of its name to IDEA. Supplementary

modifications were enacted in 1997 and 2004 to guarantee equitable availability

of educational opportunities (University of Washington, 2019).

EHA legislation evolved into the presently recognized Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (Arkansas State University, 2016). The

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a federal United States law

that guaranteed the right to a free and adequate public education (FAPE) of

children with special needs. The provision of special education services to cater to

the individualized requirements of students is mandated by the Free Appropriate

8
Public Education (FAPE) policy in public schools. The provision of specialized

instruction and ancillary services, such as counselling, speech therapy, or

transportation, is integral to facilitating the educational progress of students with

disabilities. It is imperative that students with disabilities receive these services at

no cost (Hefley, 2021).

Additionally, the provision of accommodations and modifications to

facilitate the learning and involvement of students with disabilities in the general

education curriculum is mandated by the Free Appropriate Public Education

(FAPE) policy for public schools. Individuals who are covered under the

W
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) are entitled to receive a

personalized education plan that encompasses various services, regular assessment


IE
of progress, yearly objectives, and other significant details (Hefley, 2021).

According to legal regulations, educational institutions are obligated to


EV

furnish suitable instruction to every student while minimizing limitations on their

learning environment. This implies that it is impermissible to segregate minors


PR

who utilize mobility aids or other supportive apparatus from their non-disabled

peers. Every child is entitled to receive an education and the opportunity to

establish a prosperous future. This implies that it is imperative for children to be

provided with an educational environment that is characterized by diversity,

wherein each student brings forth a unique set of attributes and capabilities. The

creation of a learning environment that accurately reflects the diversity and

complexity of the broader society is crucial in instilling in students the value of

treating all individuals with dignity and consideration. The provision of special

education facilitates the discovery and expression of individual voices among all

students, albeit through diverse means (Arkansas State University, 2016).

9
IDEA developed FAPE in order to guarantee that students with disabilities and

their families have access to appropriate educational supports and services, the

law grants them specific rights and safeguards (U.S. Department of Education,

2020). The act has undergone several amendments by legislators in order to

integrate the knowledge gained by schools and families on the most effective

ways to cater to the needs of children. The United States has transitioned from

segregating children with disabilities in self-contained classrooms to

implementing inclusive classrooms that facilitate learning among children with

diverse abilities (Arkansas State University, 2016).

W
The No Child Left Behind Act

No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was signed into law by President
IE
George W. Bush on January 8, 2002 (Hursch, 2007). The primary objective of

NCLB was to guarantee equal educational opportunities for all students,


EV

irrespective of their socioeconomic background or racial identity. The legislation

was broadly applicable to all public schools catering to students from kindergarten
PR

to grade 12 across the United States. In contrast to prior iterations of the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), NCLB legislation-imposed

responsibility on educational institutions for the academic progress and

accomplishments of their students. The alterations implemented in the NCLB

policy generated controversy, yet they compelled educational institutions to

concentrate on the education of underprivileged students (Lee, 2014).

NCLB increased the provision of educational opportunities for students

who come from low-income households, individuals from non-white racial or

ethnic backgrounds who are enrolled in educational institutions, students who are

beneficiaries of special education provisions, and individuals with limited or no

10
proficiency in the English language (Lee, 2014). NCLB ensured that special

education teachers have the necessary qualifications to provide high-quality

instruction to students who receive special education services. Graduation rates

are a required academic indicator under NCLB's provisions for defining and

measuring adequate yearly progress (AYP) (Birman et al., 2007). Furthermore,

states are required to measure and report graduation rates for all subgroups,

primarily students with disabilities, and establish performance targets for

graduation to determine the AYP.

W
IE
EV
PR

11
Before NCLB, there was no requirement in the United States to track

special education graduation rates. NCLB policy made it mandatory that schools

reported graduation data for various student groups one of which is special

education. Pre-NCLB, special education graduation rates were determined based

on state specific reporting systems. This method made it impossible to develop a

comprehensive national comparison because the information states assessed and

reported differed from one another.

NCLB was heavily criticized. One of the main issues raised was the

narrowing of the curriculum due to an excessive focus on preparing for

W
standardized tests to achieve high scores (Mann, 2016). Critics also argued that

the law was overly prescriptive, limiting the authority of states to develop their
IE
own distinct special education policies. As a response to these criticisms, the

Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was introduced in 2015 to replace NCLB.
EV

The goal of implementing ESSA was to address and rectify some of the concerns

associated with the previous legislation.


PR

Every Student Succeeds Act

ESSA of 2015 was signed into law by President Barack Obama with the

intention of addressing concerns related to NCLB. Despite ESSA is abeing a

national policy, states hadhave the authority to specify how they account for

students’ success. Each state has the freedom to determine how to close the

achievement gap for disadvantaged students, which includes those who receive

special education services. Under ESSA, unlike NCLB, students are not required

to meet proficiency standards. Instead, states set their own long-term goals and

measurements of student achievement (International Literacy Association, 2016).

12
Challenges in Special Education Graduation Rates in the South

The United States has a long and intricate history of formulating,

implementing, and amending special education policies over several decades.

Despite notable strides in championing the rights of students with special needs,

the U.S. faces significant hurdles, primarily the low graduation rates among

special education students. These challenges underscore the need for a thorough

assessment of existing special education policies and practices. It is also crucial to

narrow the gap between resource allocation and policy implementation to ensure

that special education programs are adequately supported. By strategically

W
directing resources, prioritizing the creation of personalized educational plans, and

fostering inclusive settings, the U.S. can equip special needs students with the
IE
essential tools for academic and social success. Therefore, the development and

implementation of effective policies aimed at boosting graduation rates for special


EV

education students are of paramount importance.

According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics


PR

(NCES), the graduation rate for students in special education during the 2018-

2019 school year was 67.1%. In comparison, the graduation rate for their non-

disabled peers was 85.3%.

13

Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

You might also like